WSA352
Hysteron Proteron: The Sinister Dialect:
“I. On a basic level, the dialectic is concerned with simple opposition – with defiance of what is accepted or conventional at particular times. This is heresy – the Adversarial role, a challenge against both conscious and unconscious norms. This opposition works on two levels – the individual, and society. 1) individual: The strategy is to provide opportunities for individuals to discover the hidden/forbidden within their own psyche, or lead them/influence them toward this. This means catharsis on an individual level. 2) Society: The strategy means Satanic individuals/organizations disseminate (often with no direct Satanic connotations) heretical ideas or otherwise encourage them. The aim of both (1) and (2) is to challenge and thus provoke change, reaction.”
Heresy:
“Heresy is an introduced change to some system of belief, especially a religion, that conflicts with the previously established canon of that belief.
The study of heresy is heresiology. The founder of a heresy is called a heresiarch. One who espouses heresy is called a heretic.” – Wiki
“Progress”: [http://www.answers.com/topic/progress]:
- Movement, as toward a goal; advance.
- Development or growth: students who show progress.
- Steady improvement, as of a society or civilization: a believer in human progress. See synonyms at development.
- A ceremonial journey made by a sovereign through his or her realm.
intr.v. pro·gress (prə-grĕs‘), -gressed, -gress·ing, -gress·es.
- To advance; proceed: Work on the new building progressed at a rapid rate.
- To advance toward a higher or better stage; improve steadily: as medical technology progresses.
- To increase in scope or severity, as a disease taking an unfavorable course.
Orthodoxy:
“The word orthodox, from Greek orthodoxos “having the right opinion,” from orthos (“right, true, straight”) + doxa (“opinion, praise”, related to dokein, “thinking”),[1] is typically used to mean adhering to the accepted or traditional and established faith, especially in religion.” -Wiki
Stagnant:
“1. Lacking freshness, motion, flow, progress, or change; stale; motionless; still.” – Wiktionary
Religion:
“A religion is a set of stories, symbols, beliefs and practices, often with a supernatural quality, that give meaning to the practitioner’s experiences of life through reference to an ultimate power or reality.” – Wiki
Tradition:
“The word tradition comes from the Latin traditionem, acc. of traditio which means “handing over, passing on”, and is used in a number of ways in the English language:
- Beliefs or customs taught by one generation to the next, often orally. For example, we can speak of the tradition of sending birth announcements.
- A set of customs or practices. For example, we can speak of Christmas traditions.
- A broad religious movement made up of religious denominations or church bodies that have a common history, customs, culture, and, to some extent, body of teachings. For example, one can speak of Islam‘s Sufi tradition or Christianity’s Lutheran tradition.
However, on a more basic theoretical level, tradition(s) can be seen as information or composed of information. For that which is brought into the present from the past, in a particular societal context, is information. This is even more fundamental than particular acts or practices even if repeated over a long sequence of time.”
Meme:
“A meme (pronounced /miːm/) comprises a unit or element of cultural ideas, symbols or practices; such units or elements transmit from one mind to another through speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena. The etymology of the term relates to the Greek word mimema for mimic.[1] Memes act as cultural analogues to genes in that they self-replicate and respond to selective pressures. [...] Meme-theorists contend that memes evolve by natural selection (in a manner similar to that of biological evolution) through the processes of variation, mutation, competition, and inheritance influencing an individual entity’s reproductive success. Memes spread through the behaviors that they generate in their hosts. Memes that propagate less prolifically may become extinct, while others may survive, spread, and (for better or for worse) mutate. Theorists point out that memes which replicate the most effectively spread best, and some memes may replicate effectively even when they prove detrimental to the welfare of their hosts.” -Wiki
The point to all these quotes and definitions will become apparent as we move down this blog.
So… Two important things I have noticed about the ONA, which attracted me/us/352 to its ‘teachings’ is that 1) it urges the individual to advance and progress to become something more (‘ubermensch’ or ‘Homo Galactica’) than it already is thru various means such as personal and direct experience of the natural world; and 2) it sees that civilization can also progress and become better, and actually has systems of “magic” and objectives to produce this progressive change in human civilization.
Is it within the limits of reason to say that if an individual refuses to change and does not desire to progress that the individual is stagnant and will NOT change, thus, remaining the same? Would it also be reasonable to say that if a society, city-state, and/or civilization is stagnant and refuses to change that it will also NOT change?
Then we should ask ourselve, or speculate: That if the key to evolution, selective breeding, and the survival of an organism depends on it’s ability to change and ADAPT to it’s changing enviornment… assuming that environments aren’t static-stagnant phenomena… that the organism, unable to adapt to a new environment, will go extinct?
If so, is it reasonable to assume that organism like Homo Neanderthalis and Homo Erectus have become extinct due to an inability to adapt to a change brought about by the appearence of Homo Sapiens and its effect on the shared environment? As with stagnant cultures and civilizations like the Maya, Aztec, Inca, Ancient Egypt, who did not adapt to the change brought about by more advanced culture: i.e.: Spain and Rome?
If the above makes sense, that the lack of change and adaptation may and can cause the extinction of species and civilizations, is not the same also possible for coherent memetic systems such as ‘religion’, ‘culture’, and ‘tradition?’ That is to say that stagnant-orthodoxy is prone to extinction if unwilling or unable to adapt and change from exposure to new memetic clusters?
All this nudging within the “Traditon” of the “Nine Angles” to become better, change oneself and manifest a better civilization for our species is wonderful, and will work so long as the “memetic dark tradition” is pass down from one generation, one initiate, to the next. But there is a minor flaw, which is inherent in all memetic systems – the flaw is that memetic systems which have proven itself strong and mass replicatable will ‘hold’ onto the essential nature which causes it to be mass replicatable and thus, becomes resistant to change, unless the host mind introduces a ‘change’ into the memetic system – producing what may be called a “Heresy.” Heresy does not come naturally to an orthodox religion or tradition. It must be introduced. By “orthodox” we mean to say a memetic system which has coagulated into a functioning self-replicating coherent meta-organism.
What does this mean for an initiate of the ONA… or any tradition which urges change? it means the tradition itself when introduced to an accepting mind produces the desired change and progression… but this change and progression only happens in the initiate and NOT the Tradition. What does that mean? That means that the initiate, as a biological organism may survive and adapt to any change in society or the environment; but the tradition itself will NOT. Without the CAUSE of the change/progression, there can be no progression.
The question then becomes: does the “Tradition” of the “Nine Angles” have the ability to change and progress, alongside its host and the environment its host exists within, or is it a concrete-stagnant-orthodoxy? How does the ONA meta-organism react to and cope with change when a new heretical interpretation of its esoterica is introduced?
If the ONA meta-organism resist adaptation, change, progression, and continuous growth, it will gradually be replaced by a better memtic system which is more advantageous to a future mind. We cannot assume that a person/mind 20-100 years from now will have the same mental capacity as we do now. If the Dark Tradition is to survive into the future, to continue to cause change and manifest a Galactic Civilization, it must allow itself to become a progressive heresy. Like a flowing river which is never the same river twice, as opposed to a stagnant pool which breeds microbes. Yesterdays ONA should be different from tomorrow’s. One initiate’s ONA should be different from the next initiate’s. Each initiate’s ONA must progress along side it’s own continuous mental advancement. The ONA itself as a meta-organism must struggle to survive, out compete, out adapt, out prey, over use, and over abuse, other meta-organisms to become the top of a memetic system food chain, in tandem to it’s host’s biological struggle to out compete and progress past other people. The ONA itself must be as a meta-organism as limitless and ruthless as the initiates it produces, or die.
Is such a thing possible? It’s not possible if the initiate itself believes that the outer form and shell of the ONA is sacred in some way which should not be molested or altered. It’s not possible if the initiate holds onto with his being the superficial dark and satanic glamour and exoterica, confusing it for the source, the force, and the essence. Hugging a tree along side a hiking trail is very different from hiking the trail and enjoying the forest as it passes by. There is movement in one, and an adoration of outer form in another.
What does it matter than if one initiate sees Satan as a natural force, while another sees it as a literal deity? What does it matter if one initiate sees Baphomet as a bloody Kali while the next sees Her as the immaculate Sophia? Is the ONA great and vast enough, like the great and vast mind that concieved it, for superficial contradictions? It’s the Ghost in the Shell that is the living vitality. The Shell must malt at times, if there is to be growth. But no matter what the outer shell may come to be, is not the Ghost within always the same?
Isn’t this the one great thing we learn from Insight Roles? That no matter what shape we shift into, what character we play in this pageantry of life, or what our methd of expresion may be, that beneath it all there is something living and vital that remains essencially the same?
All those years an individual grows in ages, and the experiences and memories an individual may accumulate differece from years to year, and season to season. The mentality and wisdom of an individual when it was 2 years old, and 10, and 50 may be very superficially different, but beneath it all, something remains eternally the same – that immutable thing we refer to as “I.” In the same way that the awareness and mind which once expressed itself as Anton Long is the same essencial immutable being, no matter how it expresses itself now, or what outer form it has taken?
But I fear even the ONA is prone to orthodoxy, “dogmatization,” and stagnation. It is not its fault as a coherent memetic system. The fault lies in the host it has infected, and the ridgidity of the host’s mind to not allow for a change or introduction of change into the system. Isn’t this the nature of a “Heresy” though?
The weakness lies within the source of this memetic system we call the Dark Tradition. That being- it eminated from one mind, inheriting this same single mind’s genius and strong points… but as well as this same minds weaknesses, volnerability, and subjective fears. The fruit never falls far from the tree. We are often blind to our own weak points, or as Jesus once put it: You can see the dust in your neighbor’s eye, but you can’t see the dust in your own. This makes Companionship a wonderful commodity, because strengths are complimented, while weaknesses are pointed out and improved upon.
Is it possible then for a second mind to come along, chose to be host to this memetic system and beome a companion, but say: Those are strong points, but I see a weakness, lets refine those weaknesses so we’ll have something better? But as I search on the interent, I don’t see this. All I see are individuals who “Presence” the Dark, rightly trying to propagate the memes, but innovations of these memes are rare, far and few. What constructive critical dialogue of weak points are presened, are often met with misunderstanding and an inability to empathize with the new or innovative view point. This is one advantage lost when Anton Long “left.” Without a central mind to introduce change and progression to a system, the host minds of said system resists change, and sees it as a hostile threat. When the system does not progress, it is doomed.
- Chloe 352
